I'm trying to adapt the citation formatting provided by the verbose-trad2 style for biblatex to conform to very particular specifications I've been given. I think verbose-trad2 is the closest to all my needs amongst the default ones.

The citations are to be given in footnotes, usually as \footcite{}, but occasionally with \footnote{Some remark... \cite{}.}. What I call here a full citation is the whole info on a work: author, title, publisher, date, etc. What I call an abbreviated citation is just author (always complete!), abbreviated title, and optionally the page number. The first time a work is cited, I must use the full citation, and then it depends on whether other works are cited in between or not, but never more than the abbreviated citation.

The biblatex related code I've already come up with can be found here. The LaTeX document itself is an article with the option onepage.

First, two hacks I have already applied.

  1. Always print the full name of the author. Thus I set idemtracker=false.
  2. The word Idem must be used when two subsequent citations share the same author and title (instead of the default Ibid in verbose-trad2). Thus I redefined ibidem = idem.

Second, there are things I still need to adapt, for which I don't have the faintest idea, even after looking through the documentation and this site. (I may have missed something, because I'm not at ease with low-level tex or biblatex code, I apologize if that's the case.)

  1. When two subsequent citations share the same author, title and page number (given in the square bracket argument of the \footcite[]{} command), just print Ibid. (nothing else).
  2. Always begin the foonote section of a new page with a full or abbreviated citation (author (full), abbreviated title, page number), never start with an idem or ibid. even if the last citation on the previous one is similar/same. I thought the biblatex documentation implied this would work out of the box, but it doesn't seem to.
  3. (Optional) Abbreviated title means: if there is only one work by the author, use the expression op. cit., else use an abbreviated form of the title (do I necessarily have to use the shorttitle field in the bibTeX entries?)

Thanks in advance for any suggestions and help!

  • Just for completeness's sake, I found this question that might help one day, seeing the way I mix \footcite and \footnote{ ... \cite ... } – Christoph B. Jun 10 '12 at 14:36

For request no. 1, add the option ibidpage=true. Quoting p. 2 of 75-style-verbose-trad2.pdf:

The ibidpage option

The scholarly abbreviation ibidem is sometimes taken to mean both ‘same author + same title’ and ‘same author + same title + same page’ in traditional citation schemes. By default, this is not the case with this style because it may lead to ambiguous citations. If you you prefer the wider interpretation of ibidem, set the package option ibidpage=true or simply ibidpage in the preamble. The default setting is ibidpage=false.

For request no. 2, an \iffirstonpage test has to be added to the cite bibmacro; if the test yields true, the bibmacros cite:name and cite:title have to be used.



        {\iffirstonpage% NEW
           {\usebibmacro{cite:name}% NEW
            \usebibmacro{cite:title}}% NEW
%       \usebibmacro{cite:save}}% DELETED
        \usebibmacro{cite:save}}}% NEW


  author = {Author, A.},
  year = {2001},
  title = {Alpha},


\textheight=100pt% just for the example


Some text \autocite[99]{A01}.

Some text \autocite[99]{A01}.


Some text \autocite{A01}.


Some text \autocite{A01}.



enter image description here

enter image description here

enter image description here

  • Thank you very much! I'm sorry I missed such an obvious one as the ibidpage option. To explicit the 2nd solution, one must remember to set pagetracker=true (it was already set to that in my example, I just want to specify it here for future reference). There'd be some follow up questions I'd like to ask, should I post a new question or can we continue here? – Christoph B. Jun 10 '12 at 14:29
  • @ChristophB. A new question would be better -- in fact, the present question would have been better as two or three separate questions. – lockstep Jun 10 '12 at 14:55
  • okay, thank you very much for your help so far. – Christoph B. Jun 10 '12 at 15:21

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.